Experimental Aircraft End

Status
Not open for further replies.
brien23

brien23

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,489
Location
Oak Harbor
Display Name
Display name:
Brien
Experimental aircraft owners are great at building informative groups lots of information. A lot of owners do a real good job of building their Aircraft and know how to maintain them. Problem arises when some rogue owners think or don't know or don't care what their letter of authorization is, change engine types, props or other major parts of the plane and still operate it under the original Special Airworthiness Certificate. The Experimental Aircraft group has done a real poor job of getting the word out about what is legal and what is not. Those of you who know what you can and can't do need to get the word out and clean up your own rogue pilots. If you Experimental Aircraft types don't clean up your act, the FAA will step in and you probably wont like new rules and regulations they might come up with.:nono:
 
Last edited:
Cool story bro.

Btw, why are these pilots reddened? I assume that rogue pilots prefer rouge makeup?
 
Brian, I have an experimental plane. I can legally change the engine, the wings, the fuselage, or anything else...I just have to log the changes, revert to Phase I operation, and if all is well, make another log entry to that effect.

I can do this because my Operating Limitations say so.

Comments like yours seem to come from A&P folks who think that passing the A&P exam, even barely, makes them some sort of authority.

Changes to experimental aircraft are completely legal..just do the paper work.
 
JohnWF said:
Brian, I have an experimental plane. I can legally change the engine, the wings, the fuselage, or anything else...I just have to log the changes, revert to Phase I operation, and if all is well, make another log entry to that effect.

I can do this because my Operating Limitations say so.

Comments like yours seem to come from A&P folks who think that passing the A&P exam, even barely, makes them some sort of authority.

Changes to experimental aircraft are completely legal..just do the paper work.
Click to expand...

You missed the point I made your letter of limitation may let you legally change the engine not all letters of limitation are the same you have to abide by the letter that apply to your aircraft. If your one of those who think they can do what they want well your what the problem is.:popcorn:
 
brien23 said:
Experimental aircraft owners are great at building informative groups lots of information. A lot of owners do a real good job of building their Aircraft and know how to maintain them. Problem arises when some rouge owners think or don't know or don't care what their letter of authorization is, change engine types, props or other major parts of the plane and still operate it under the original Special Airworthiness Certificate. The Experimental Aircraft group has done a real poor job of getting the word out about what is legal and what is not. Those of you who know what you can and can't do need to get the word out and clean up your own rogue pilots. If you Experimental Aircraft types don't clean up your act, the FAA will step in and you probably wont like new rules and regulations they might come up with.:nono:
Click to expand...

And you're an expert in this assessment of the situation and the eventual result just how....? :rolleyes:
 
brien23 said:
Experimental aircraft owners are great at building informative groups lots of information. A lot of owners do a real good job of building their Aircraft and know how to maintain them. Problem arises when some rouge owners think or don't know or don't care what their letter of authorization is, change engine types, props or other major parts of the plane and still operate it under the original Special Airworthiness Certificate. The Experimental Aircraft group has done a real poor job of getting the word out about what is legal and what is not. Those of you who know what you can and can't do need to get the word out and clean up your own rogue pilots. If you Experimental Aircraft types don't clean up your act, the FAA will step in and you probably wont like new rules and regulations they might come up with.:nono:
Click to expand...


From this post you would think the "Experimental category" Has just been in force for the last few years and anyone using this category of airplanes are just not doing it right or correctly.

Also from this post it makes anyone flying a GA airplane to sound like they just have more smarts then those flying an Experimental.

Tony
 
This thread reminds me of a wrestling promo:

"Ooh yeah, you better watch out or the FAA is comin' to get cha!!"
 
brien23 said:
Experimental aircraft owners are great at building informative groups lots of information. A lot of owners do a real good job of building their Aircraft and know how to maintain them. Problem arises when some rouge owners think or don't know or don't care what their letter of authorization is, change engine types, props or other major parts of the plane and still operate it under the original Special Airworthiness Certificate. The Experimental Aircraft group has done a real poor job of getting the word out about what is legal and what is not. Those of you who know what you can and can't do need to get the word out and clean up your own rogue pilots. If you Experimental Aircraft types don't clean up your act, the FAA will step in and you probably wont like new rules and regulations they might come up with.:nono:
Click to expand...

Red owners? Do you mean American Indians? Bad form!
 
What I get from this post...

I really do not like Experimental types and they need to do things my way or the way us GA folks do things for nothing else is safe and we will all die if not done this way.

I needed a laugh today. Thanks

Tony
 
1600vw said:
From this post you would think the "Experimental category" Has just been in force for the last few years and anyone using this category of airplanes are just not doing it right or correctly.

Also from this post it makes anyone flying a GA airplane to sound like they just have more smarts then those flying an Experimental.

Tony
Click to expand...

I am just saying their is not a lot of oversight by the FAA on Experimental Aircraft. Should a few rogue pilot's do what the want and someone with a experimental does something stupid and the news latches on the result from the FAA will not be to any of our benefit.
 
JohnWF said:
Brian, I have an experimental plane. I can legally change the engine, the wings, the fuselage, or anything else...I just have to log the changes, revert to Phase I operation, and if all is well, make another log entry to that effect.

I can do this because my Operating Limitations say so.

Comments like yours seem to come from A&P folks who think that passing the A&P exam, even barely, makes them some sort of authority.

Changes to experimental aircraft are completely legal..just do the paper work.
Click to expand...
So under you letter of limitations you could change you plane into a helicopter with only a log book entry.
 
brien23 said:
So under you letter of limitations you could change you plane into a helicopter with only a log book entry.
Click to expand...
Nope. As he said, he'd also have to revert to Phase 1 operations....perform test flights to re-prove the aircraft. Remember, the DAR inspection primarily is concerned with *paperwork*. And the plane has already been signed off.

However, I used to fly a homebuilt that could switch from monoplane to biplane configuration and back, with only a log entry....no test period required.

And it's "Operating Limitations," not "letter of limitations." Don't confuse it with a LOA.

Ron Wanttaja
 
Last edited:
wanttaja said:
Nope. As he said, he'd have to revert to Phase 1 operations....perform test flights to re-prove the aircraft. Remember, the DAR inspection primarily is concerned with *paperwork*. And the plane has already been signed off.

However, I used to fly a homebuilt that could switch from monoplane to biplane configuration and back, with only a log entry....no test period required.

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...

You Rebel you......;).........:D...
 
E-AB aircraft are the present-day lifeblood of general aviation. They're not going away. Quite the opposite, they're proliferating and thriving. Spend a couple days at Airventure and you'll see why.

BTW, how's the FAA approval and repair on that cracked PA28 rear spar carry-thru coming along?
 
Wow jealous of the experimental group or what?
 
brien23 said:
You missed the point I made your letter of limitation may let you legally change the engine not all letters of limitation are the same you have to abide by the letter that apply to your aircraft. If your one of those who think they can do what they want well your what the problem is.:popcorn:
Click to expand...
Did you check the box "Understands English"? If so, you are in violation of the terms of your application.

So far as I can see it is Grammar 3, Brien 0.


Jim
 
Last edited:
I rate this thread 2/10. It would be a 1, but it's about experimentals which are cool, so it gets a point back.
 
brien23 said:
I am just saying their is not a lot of oversight by the FAA on Experimental Aircraft. Should a few rogue pilot's do what the want and someone with a experimental does something stupid and the news latches on the result from the FAA will not be to any of our benefit.
Click to expand...

You've not learned from a earlier advisory that you're failing spelling, word choice, and punctuation applications, all of which diminish your alleged authority to profess.

HR
 
Lawreston said:
You've not learned from a earlier advisory that you're failing spelling, word choice, and punctuation applications, all of which diminish your alleged authority to profess.
Click to expand...
Well, to be fair -- no more than his statements have, even if they had been properly composed and correctly spelled.

:rolleyes2:
 
Nevermind what they say, experimental aircraft love it when you violate their operating limitations...
 
Copy.

So what I am getting from this is a unqualified attack on.....who? the builders?

If you are going to post a gripe fest at least qualify why you feel this way. With out some basis of understanding or cited work then you do nothing but discredit what you are saying.

Additionally, for those who use personal attacks on grammar, syntax, and use of the english diction....We are only the product of our public school systems. I fail everyday at this, however does this mean I am uneducated? No, I have a masters, years of professional work education, as well as teach several college subjects (fortunately not english :p) . Some of the worst offenders I have seen are engineers, mathematicians, and scientist with doctoral degrees. Please don't revert to personal attacks due to the use of the written language. If you discredit someone, do it on their message not their typing abilities.
 
Brien, I don't know what started you on this rant, but EAA does an exceptional job of keeping the experimental community informed. It is also the personal responsibility of the individual to know and follow the regs, not the job of some external watchdog.

I know of a guy who bought a certificated airplane, flew it over 1,000 hours including into towered airports, and sold it, all without a pilot certificate of any kind. (Then there's Alaska.) The idea that owners of experimentals are more roguish than the rest of aviation has no basis in fact.

brien23 said:
...Problem arises when some rogue owners...change engine types, props or other major parts of the plane and still operate it under the original Special Airworthiness Certificate.
Click to expand...

Builders who experiment are not rogues, they're using the regulations in the manner they were designed. As noted above, these changes are all allowed under Experimental Amateur Built regs (see the "Experimental" in the name?) as are major airframe changes which alter weight and CG. You notify your FSDO about the change and propose a new Phase I test, and the FAA is free to alter the five-hour duration or the proposed location, but usually won't. Finish testing, make the logbook entry, done.

brien23 said:
...If you Experimental Aircraft types don't clean up your act...
Click to expand...

It always helps your case to start an argument with "you people" or the like. Exactly what type of person flies an experimental aircraft, Brien?

brien23 said:
I am just saying their (sic) is not a lot of oversight by the FAA on Experimental Aircraft...
Click to expand...

Experimentals receive heavy attention from the FAA, including the individual airworthiness inspection of each aircraft by the FAA or a delegate. The community is currently fighting a proposed new policy document (300 pages long) which would put new limits on E-LSAs and completely prohibit flight over populated areas for all electric-powered aircraft, with no data to support the need for the changes. Like all of aviation, we're constantly fending off "solutions looking for problems."

Brien, it's OK if you just don't like experimentals, but just say so.
 
Last edited:
A reminder to not make this personal. Discuss the topic, not the person.
 
PW_Plack said:
You notify your FSDO about the change and propose a new Phase I test, and the FAA is free to alter the five-hour duration or the proposed location, but usually won't. Finish testing, make the logbook entry, done.
Click to expand...

Many experimental amateur-built aircraft that received their AW cert / op lims from 1999 thru 2003 were issued a more lenient version of the op lims (specifically paragraph 19) that has no requirement to notify the FSDO when you put the plane back into Phase 1 for major alterations or to get concurrence of an area in which to perform the Phase 1 flying. You simply log what's been done to the aircraft and put the plane into Phase 1 yourself for a minimum of 5 hours (day VFR only, sparsely populated area), and sign it back into Phase 2 when done with Phase 1.
 
Last edited:
brien23 said:
Experimental aircraft owners are great at building informative groups lots of information. A lot of owners do a real good job of building their Aircraft and know how to maintain them. Problem arises when some rogue owners think or don't know or don't care what their letter of authorization is, change engine types, props or other major parts of the plane and still operate it under the original Special Airworthiness Certificate. The Experimental Aircraft group has done a real poor job of getting the word out about what is legal and what is not. Those of you who know what you can and can't do need to get the word out and clean up your own rogue pilots. If you Experimental Aircraft types don't clean up your act, the FAA will step in and you probably wont like new rules and regulations they might come up with.:nono:
Click to expand...

First...

Let me guess...

1- You and Tom are friends:dunno:.......:idea:
2- You are a A&P and maybe even an IA...:dunno:

3- You are upset that experimental builders DON'T need your service..:yes:

4- So you lash out at a segment that can do that same stuff you do..:yes:

Get over it buddy.... Experimentals are here to stay and are forging the way ahead for GA.. Like it or not.....

Off my soapbox.....

Ben.

Edit.... sorry Bill,, I was posting when you reminded us not to attack the person....

Just subsitute the word "them" for "you"....;).......:D
 
Last edited:
PW_Plack said:
Brien, I don't know what started you on this rant, but you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. EAA does an exceptional job of keeping the experimental community informed. It is also the personal responsibility of the individual to know and follow the regs, not the job of some external watchdog.

I know of a guy who bought a certificated airplane, flew it over 1,000 hours including into towered airports, and sold it, all without a pilot certificate of any kind. (Then there's Alaska.) The idea that owners of experimentals are more roguish than the rest of aviation has no basis in fact.



Builders who experiment are not rogues, they're using the regulations in the manner they were designed. As noted above, these changes are all allowed under Experimental Amateur Built regs (see the "Experimental" in the name?) as are major airframe changes which alter weight and CG. You notify your FSDO about the change and propose a new Phase I test, and the FAA is free to alter the five-hour duration or the proposed location, but usually won't. Finish testing, make the logbook entry, done.



It always helps your case to start an argument with "you people" or the like. Exactly what type of person flies an experimental aircraft, Brien?



This is the most clueless statement of all. Experimentals receive heavy attention from the FAA, including the individual airworthiness inspection of each aircraft by the FAA or a delegate. The community is currently fighting a proposed new policy document (300 pages long) which would put new limits on E-LSAs and completely prohibit flight over populated areas for all electric-powered aircraft, with no data to support the need for the changes. Like all of aviation, we're constantly fending off "solutions looking for problems."

Brien, it's OK if you just don't like experimentals, but just say so. There's no need to make stuff up.
Click to expand...

My post is not directed at all Experimental operators just the few who do not care or just do what they want are the problem. Those who are trying to do the right thing and working within the system are not the problem.
 
brien23 said:
My post is not directed at all Experimental operators just the few who do not care or just do what they want are the problem. Those who are trying to do the right thing and working within the system are not the problem.
Click to expand...

How is that different from certified airplane owners?
 
bullwinkle said:
How is that different from certified airplane owners?
Click to expand...

I would be willing to bet there is a larger percentage of certified owners doing ILLEGAL work on their certified planes compared to experimental owners who are doing questionable work on their experimentals.. IMHO...

And A&P's / IA's pencil whipping annuals is probably a larger problem then both combined... :yes:
 
brien23 said:
My post is not directed at all Experimental operators just the few who do not care or just do what they want are the problem. Those who are trying to do the right thing and working within the system are not the problem.
Click to expand...
Do you have specific examples of E/AB or EX/EX owners "just doing what they want" and NOT following regulations? Or is it just a feeling you get? I'm trying to figure out what it is you have a problem with.
 
brien23 said:
Experimental aircraft owners are great at building informative groups lots of information. A lot of owners do a real good job of building their Aircraft and know how to maintain them. Problem arises when some rogue owners think or don't know or don't care what their letter of authorization is, change engine types, props or other major parts of the plane and still operate it under the original Special Airworthiness Certificate. The Experimental Aircraft group has done a real poor job of getting the word out about what is legal and what is not. Those of you who know what you can and can't do need to get the word out and clean up your own rogue pilots. If you Experimental Aircraft types don't clean up your act, the FAA will step in and you probably wont like new rules and regulations they might come up with.:nono:
Click to expand...


I know lots of experimental aircraft owners. I know lots of certified aircraft owners. You may not like it, but I can tell you when it comes to performing unauthorized maintenance and unauthorized modifications the certified owners are by far more guilty (not that I blame them really).
 
In case anyone is wondering what prompted a crazy person go off the rails, another crazy person has an explanation about the crazy persons in our regulatory body. Apparently they intend to prohibit carriage of passengers in E-LSAs that were converted from S-LSAs (and electrically powered airplanes, but nobody cares about those).
http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs/media/DRAFT_Order_8130.2.pdf
(page C-2, best of all search for "rocket" or "electric")
 
N801BH said:
First...

Let me guess...

1- You and Tom are friends:dunno:.......:idea:

Yes I have known Brien since 1992 +- a year or two

2- You are a A&P and maybe even an IA...:dunno:

He is, and a lot more :)

3- You are upset that experimental builders DON'T need your service..:yes:

He owns a EXP and does conditional inspections on several EXP aircraft

4- So you lash out at a segment that can do that same stuff you do..:yes:

Like what ? he can go both ways how about you?

Get over it buddy.... Experimentals are here to stay and are forging the way ahead for GA.. Like it or not....
Click to expand...

Believe me Brien is more up to date on the regulations on EXP aircraft than you will ever be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top